More Open Space

[Birgitt Bolton]

Often people decide they want to do Open Space after they have already made
commitments to presenters. And what to do about that?? At other times, the
facilitator faces just what you are now facing with pressure to include
presenters. There have been differing comments on this list over time about
when and how any presenters should be included. The keynote at the
beginning, the keynote at lunch and so on. In an ideal situation, to really
open the space, keynotes wouldn't be part of the program and presenters
would be part of the circle and be in the same position as all others, just
as Harrison says. My experience is if I can't avoid having the keynote, then
I insist it be at the very beginning and use it as part of the context
setting for the Open Space or that they do the keynote over a supper if
we've finished our os sessions for the day. Never at lunch. And never at the
end or it affects both the momentum/energy and the tolerance or lack thereof
for the speaker (which is not fair to the speaker). If presenters are
approached well and have the process explained, there are no bruised egos
from being part of the process and trusting that people will show up at
their sessions-I have found these folks, be they doctors, engineers, other
"experts" quite agreeable although a bit fearful. Egos get bruised only when
people actually don't show up to their sessions-and that is a story in
itself. Or when they do show up and the law of two feet works.

One event that Harrison and I did had a full rostrum of presenters lined up
for the first day, before the organizers engaged us to do the Open Space. I
met with the organizer, who is a woman of courage, and went over the
drawbacks with her of staying with a day of presenters followed by a day and
a half of Open Space. And the benefits of doing 2 1/2 days in Open Space.
She wanted the best and as a woman of courage contacted all of the
presenters even though previous agreements had been entered into , and
explained that they were no longer to be at the conference as a presenter,
but they would be posting their issue/opportunity just like everyone else.
If they were bringing slides etc., the rooms would be set up in such a way
that they could go with their original presentation---just no guarantee if
anyone would show up. All presenters were agreeable. These were all well
known Canadians-researchers, doctors, political figures. The logistics took
a little fiddling because we had to ensure that these folks got into the
rooms that actually had projectors etc. In each case, some people showed up
to their group. Some presenters went with slide shows, their planned
speeches etc. Which all worked out. The benefit was that they left space in
their session for discussion too and all left richer from the two way
opportunity. No bruised egos from going from presenter to participant.

The conference organizers were pleased that they had the courage to
reconfigure their conference. Interestingly enough, the two primary
organizers have since come to Open Space Training sessions and are committed
to doing Open Space.


In another situation, Harrison came up to Ontario to  do an Open Space with
Larry Peterson and I. We could not get the organizers of the conference to
retract from a day of presenters that they had for day 3. Two days of Open
Space, followed by a day of presenters. The lost opportunities from the Open
Space were enormous. This was a conference that could have shaped and
improved social and health services in our Province and could have had
profound impact in developing a strategy that would affect the political
strategy. Folks were inspired by the two days in Open Space, but there was
no formal convergence built in and the day with presenters doused the
momentum that had been building like a pail of water on a fire. To this day,
three years later, when I run into people that were at that event, they have
negative opinions about Open Space, are not interested in using it, and it
is only when I have the chance to really explore with them on a one to one
what they are negative about, it is about the negative experienced by
unfulfillment. Having seen what was possible in the Open Space and then
feeling powerless to move forward. And we concur that the day of presenters
caused the disaster. Not the Open Space. Of course, they hold us responsible
as the facilitators for not having worked the format out so that we didn't
have the presenters. They don't know how hard we tried....my own learning
from this is to not take a contract in which I am faced with something like
this. I don't like being in a position of saying "I tried". I'm a fan of
Yoda in Star Wars  (badly paraphrased) "there is no try. You do or you don't
do.' And conduct my work accordingly.

Birgitt
-----Original Message-----
From:   OSLIST [mailto:OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU] On Behalf Of owen
Sent:   Friday, January 22, 1999 3:25 PM
To:     OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject:        Re[2]: More Open Space

>
>     Now the tension. The decision was only made yesterday, and I'm already
>     getting e-mails and calls from people who want to do what they have
>     learned to do: make presentations, "frame-in" the issues to be
>     discussion, control, control, control. I'm sure you have faced this
>     many times.
>
>     Don
>______________________________ Reply Separator
>It is their meeting, and if that is really what they want to do -- I say
carry on. Just be sure that they start where everybody else starts -- at
the edge of the circle. Stand up, state your passion and post it on the
wall. And if your passion is to give a speach -- so be it. They need to
know that the Law of Two Feet applies, even if they are the chairman of the
board. Should the other folks get bored, they will walk.

Actually I, and a lot of others I know, have blended in "presentations"
when a meeting had already been organized in a traditional way, and then
the sponsors saw the light and decided to Open Space. They couldn't very
well dis-invite the Presenters -- but they did make it clear that everybody
stood on a level field, and there were to be no "command performances."
Seemed always to work out pretty well, save for one or two slightly bruised
egos.

Harrison

_________________________________
>Subject: Re: More Open Space
>Author:  OSLIST <OSLIST at LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU>  at internet
>Date:    1/22/99 12:17 PM
>
>
>>     Hello everyone,
>>
>>     This is Don Ferretti. I asked a question of the list about using open
>>     space for strategic planning. Well, the group wants to do this in
open
>>     space. Just thought I would report back on that. Thanks for all the
>>     input. Any learning about computer:person ratios?
>>
>>     Don
>*********************************************************************
>Usual ratio is 1:100, and the same applies for breakout rooms/spaces. I
>think you will find this and other practical logistics pretty well covered
>in The User's Guide.
>Harrison